The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1887-07-23
can possibly be, to keep

Strong and not s. D. NIcEuery. These
two distinct personages are in no way
related to each other and their offices
and official duties are equally distinct.
The Secretary of State is c0nstttu-
tional officer and holds his Office by the
same tenure that Gov. McEnery holds
the voice of the people.
1t is also known that Gov. McEnery
in his zeal for the purity of our State
government called attention to the
probable defcH in the Secretary's Office
at an carly date, and even anticipated
the action of the Attorney General
within the line Of whose duties the
matter seemed more properly to lie. If
there be any ssdefalcation" 1t occurred
in that branch OF our State governs
anent presided over by Secretary viii
A. Strong and not in the gubernat0rial
where s. d. McEnery ex-
ercises control.
We congratulate the editor of the
Bulletin upon the fact that he was not
to "inier" a defense to this
charge. He even volunteers informa-
tiOn. He goes further. He even dis
cusses the matter under consideration
on its merits. We are grateful; we are
gratified. Profoundly grateful for the
Information that at the time of the
Strong defalcation the name of the Sec
rotary of State was Will A. Strong and
not s. ID. McEnery; (Gov. McEnery
will no doubt be glad to hear that,
himself;) gra,ifled at the only oppor-
tunity offered to discuss tho charge
"with all the gravity which the occa-
sion seems to demand.' Yes, it is
known that Gov. McEnery was per-
sonaIIy aware of the probable deficit
1--WE italicise tho word proballe) and
that he called attention 10 it. That is,
he called upon Mr.. Strong to make
restitution. But there his zeal ceased.
Nothing was heard of the matter after
wards until the lapse of twelve months
when the Picayune made the expose.
Then Strong was able to make the plea
of prescription based upon the fact that
the crime had been known to the Gov
ernOr for over twelve months from the
date of its commission. The court be
toro which the prosecution was begun
ovcrruied tho motion to dismiss on
that ground but many good lawyers
contend that the Supreme Court will
hold that the plea OF prescription is
good. In addition to this it may be
observed that Mr.. Strong, notwith-
standing his detalcation, is secretary OF
the State Sena to and besides holds an
appointive Office under Gov. McEnery
that of member of the police jury OF
the parish of Winn, and he is on the
finance committee of that body at that
The illusions of our contemporary to
the next and last "specific'' discussed
the Rutland grab-while really sub
lime is entirely too windy to incorpo-
rate in this article. We fear we are
growing windy ourself, but it is catch
ing. In a nutshell, the Bulletin says
that Gov. McEnery had nothing to do
with the contracts entered into by the
school boards with Rutland. Nobody
said he did and nobody but dam
phool will contend that he had. But
Gov. McEncry is cX-oilicio President
of the State Board OF Education and it
is fair TO presume that he knows some
thing about what is going on in that
department. If he does not he ought
to. Gov. McEnery is also lawyer
and he enjoys the reputation OF being a
good one. He knows whether the con-
tracts entered into by the school boards
with Rutland AFRO legal or not. If they
are not the money illegally collected by
Rutland ought 10 be recovered, and il
strikes some people very forcibiy that
Gov. McEnery ought to see to it that
it is.
In conclusion we will quote the last
paragraph of the Bulletins article
simply to expose futile effort to make
the Telegraph appear ridiculous:
The other specific charges against the
Governor contained in the Telegraph
of the 10th inst. are called "the State
ring" and "the New Orleans ring
These charges, if charges they be, seem
too vague and indie finite to call for any
special retutati0n.
Under the false hypothesis that the
charges referred to were made against
Gov. MclInery personally, tho rcdicu